Semi-Socialist Corporations

austrianecon said:

Semi-Socialist firms can't promise their bill of goods to it's workers in lean times

Click to expand...

They are not expected to do so, but they do take their time shedding workforce.

Perfectly capitalist firms don't shed staff at the first whiff of a downturn? Of course they do, and since there are no members of the labor-force on the BoD, they downsize even quicker than were there indeed such members on the BoD.

Come off your high-horse ...

Lafayette said:

They are not expected to do so, but they do take their time shedding workforce.

Perfectly capitalist firms don't shed staff at the first whiff of a downturn? Of course they do, and since there are no members of the labor-force on the BoD, they downsize even quicker than were there indeed such members on the BoD.

Come off your high-horse ...

Click to expand...

My high-horse?

Maybe you should read my second post, #9 in this topic.. In this post I said this in the first paragraph.

It's successful because it's ABSOLUTELY no different then any firm that has shareholders. Mondragón operates just like any business.

Lafayette said:

Wow! What planet do you live on ... ?

From WikiP (here): "The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics ... abbreviated to USSR ... or shortened to the Soviet Union ..., was a Marxist–Leninist state on the Eurasian continent that existed between 1922 and 1991. A union of multiple subnational Soviet republics, its government and economy were highly centralized. The Soviet Union was a one-party state, governed by the Communist Party with Moscow as its capital."

It is now a robber-barony, led and run by plutocrats who enriched themselves by manipulating the ownership of natural resources (that once belonged to the state) ...

Click to expand...

I live on earth.. in which Marx and Engles clearly defined Communism. Communism is a socioeconomic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money, and the state.

See that bold.. there is no social class, money or State in a Communist society. USSR was several different States in which there was social class, money and Government.

Every state that claims Communism or was branded Communist by the west weren't even Communist.. rather they were Dictatorships of the Proletariat, aka Socialism via state-run capitalism.

Lafayette said:

Why should we, Americans, go anywhere? The task in the US is sufficiently large, and the mentality not yet quite ready for change.

Click to expand...

It's isn't about Americans go anywhere. It's about the labor movement actually needing to moving into the 21st century, instead of being stuck in the pre-WW2 mentality. We are now in the era of Free Trade. The era of on average 40% of car parts are made overseas. Made in America: How Much of Your Car is American Made? - ABC News

The era where DVDs, Blu-Ray, CDs are actually made in Mexico. The era where the majority of clothing comes from Asia. The era where majority of computer parts, cell phones and other electronic parts are actually foreign (from Asia to EU).

The major brands Americans buy are foreign made. That's reality.

So the labor movement.. like AFL-CIO need to organize in China and other Asian countries.. but do they? No. So instead of fighting for labor rights in China and Asian which would help raise wages all the world. They stick their heads into the sand and ignore.. their roots and the fights they had to make over a 100 years ago when just starting out. They literally think they are above that now and ignore the worker.

All AFL-CIO and Richard Trumka does is bitch, moan and petition for workers who already get paid 100x more then the labor worker in China and Asia. Yet they don't realize you can't close gaps in wages if you don't close gaps of lower waged workers in other markets as there is still an incenctive for a corporation to move overseas and create unemployment in the US or Europe.

But you thought about that right?

Lafayette said:

There's a lot of work to do. Not to worry. We, the people - not "we, the sheeple" - are up to the task, because the factual evidence is on our side. And that is exactly what rattles you.

Click to expand...

So now you are an American? Yes, you are a sheeple because you don't understand how the economy and market works. If there is a country that has workers that I can pay $.80/hour to produce something that an American or European worker cost me $10 an hour.. where do you think I am gonna go do business?

Nothing rattles me.. because you don't realize the futile battle you are fighting if you fail to fix the labor issues in China and Asia.

Lafayette said:

The hidebound of your ilk, however, are the real challenge. You refuse all debate, because you have neither the qualitative nor quantitative means to respond.

Click to expand...

I've never refused to debate. I've refused to let ignorance reign supreme. That's the difference. You are rattling from a position of ignorance when it comes to labor markets.

Lafayette said:

The "facts" speak for themselves, my formulation of opinion is my own.

You don't like it? In a truly "free country", you are able to respond with factual, cogent commentary.

Try it, you'll like it ...

Click to expand...

How about you explain how you are gonna raise wages in China and Asia (I already give you the answer) to keep Corporations from exploiting cheaper labor and bypassing American and European workers?

When you answer that, you will understand the scope of HOW FAR you have to go. Then you'll understand how your ignorant "we are coming" after you doesn't rattle me. It's you that has the uphill battle and you still at 1' of the next 10,000' you have to climb.

austrianecon said:

100% rubbish on your part. Soviet Union never was Communist. It was State Capitalism and party members enriched themselves (1%) and the workers still worked for them.

Click to expand...

From Wikipedia, excerpt: "The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics abbreviated to USSR .... or shortened to the Soviet Union ..., was a Marxist–Leninist state on the Eurasian continent that existed between 1922 and 1991. A union of multiple sub-national Soviet republics, its government and economy were highly centralized. The Soviet Union was a one-party state, governed by the Communist Party with Moscow as its capital."

austrianecon said:

Every state that claims Communism or was branded Communist by the west weren't even Communist.. rather they were Dictatorships of the Proletariat, aka Socialism via state-run capitalism.

Click to expand...

Word -games; pointless commentary and a waste of bandwidth.

Some people just must have the last word. You've had yours.

Do you feel better now ... ?

austrianecon said:

Nothing rattles me.. because you don't realize the futile battle you are fighting if you fail to fix the labor issues in China and Asia.

Click to expand...

Rubbish again. The Far East will have to fix its own "labor issues".

Meanwhile, US unemployment remains at a long-term (red line, more than two years) value of 10%, see here.

Those jobs have gone forever. People will reenter the employment market but at much lower hourly rates, and likely less skilled jobs. If they are lucky - for the most part, an entire generation has got screwed job-wise.

How did Uncle Sam get into this fix? Because the American public, since the 1990s have rushed into WalMart to take advantage of Chinese-made products at much lower prices than their "Made in America" equivalents.

Which is how a market--economy is supposed to work.

Wakey, wakey ...

Lafayette said:

Not without total restraint. The National Assembly (the French legislative branch), was required to authorize the extension. (This was according to French law in the matter.)

Click to expand...

Yes, there is total restraint. There is a 90 day grace period beofre the National Assembly is required to vote. 90 days is a long time. It's why some in the US doesn't like the War Powers Act (I actually see it as uncontitional).

Lafayette said:

Can't possibly imagine what you mean by this. Clarify, please.

The French National Assembly has been functioning as before. (That is, it does nothing because its majority is held by the Socialist Party.)

Click to expand...

I mean, if France was operating as normal in governance of itself.. then the requirements were not met to declare an Emergency.

Lafayette said:

Blah, blah, blah and totally irrelevant to the subject at hand... you've gone off the deep end.

Click to expand...

It's not irrelevant. You are making the claim that the US is doing nothing yet ignored times in which France didn't do **** when it came to other "NATO" actions.

Lafayette said:

O great wisdom ... pray tell, what should it do?

Click to expand...

Is France not a member of NATO? Why isn't France calling for kicking out Turkey of NATO? If France is taking the lead, then France has to be a leader and that's get the rest of NATO to agree. Reality is.. nobody gives a flying crap about France. France left NATO for 43 years and has only been an official member for 7 years. Reality is France is the new kid on the block trying to get some street cred.

France would get more credit from me if it left NATO again over Turkey.

Lafayette said:

Again, you've got your facts wrong.

Daesh was started in Camp Bucca, where Bush/Bremer had imprisoned the high-command of Saddam's army that had surrendered. See here.

Excerpt: "In all, nine members of the Islamic State’s top command did time at Bucca, according to the terrorist analyst organization Soufan Group. Apart from Baghdadi himself, who spent five years there, the leader’s number two, Abu Muslim al-Turkmani, as well as senior military leader Haji Bakr, (now deceased), and leader of foreign fighters Abu Qasim were incarcerated there, Soufan said. Though it’s likely the men were extremists when they entered Bucca, the group added, it’s certain they were when they left."

As you will see, "al Baghdadi" was (and still is) a sex-crazed figurehead; behind the "Caliphate" he has announced were/are ex-Saddam Army officers. That is still the case, where Daesh is stationed now in Raqqa, Syria.

Click to expand...

LOL, And the Independent is wrong, in fact most media is wrong on how Daesh/ISIS formed. Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is considered the ‘mujahid sheik’by ISIS. ISIS was birthed at by al-Zaraqwi. https://web.stanford.edu/group/mappingmilitants/cgi-bin/groups/view/1

Lafayette said:

True enough, perhaps. I have no envy to authenticate what you print.

Click to expand...

Yet, you say I am not up for debating.. When France ruled Syria, the French created the Troupes spéciales du Levant. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Army_of_the_Levant

History of French mandate of Syria. Roots of Alawite-Sunni Rivalry in Syria | Middle East Policy Council

Lafayette said:

Because it is irrelevant to the present situation. The French now want Assad to go. He can join his wife and kids, who are thought to be living clandestinely in Moscow.

Click to expand...

The French can have want whatever they want but it's not Assad or his Government that killed 130 people in Paris. In fact it was Assad family for a better part of 50 years that made sure the French creation called Syria didn't collapse. It was foreign forces (ISI, Al-Nursa, and foreign Jihadist) who really changed the Syria Civil War to what it is today.

Lafayette said:

He's caused enough suffering and is directly responsible for the Great Migration across the Dardanelles to Greece and onward to the rest of Europe. Which can barely afford to house them.

Click to expand...

No doubt Assad has done bad things but he's not directly resonsible for the "Great Migration". He only controls 25% of Syria. ISIS controls 50%. It's actually 3 major factors. Assad, ISIS and Turkey not giving a crap.

THE EPITOME OF WRONGHEADEDNESS

AC:" I mean, if France was operating as normal in governance of itself.. then the requirements were not met to declare an Emergency."

160 people killed by Daesh (a foreign power), and there was "no requirement"?

What you know about France would fit a thimble. Doesn't stop you from mouthing inanities ...

AC: "You are making the claim that the US is doing nothing yet ignored times in which France didn't do **** when it came to other "NATO" actions. "

France has 4000 troops operating in the sub-Sahara fighting IS-forces there.

Wrong again ...

AC: "Is France not a member of NATO? Why isn't France calling for kicking out Turkey of NATO?"

Because not only has Turkey attacked an ally in the fight against the IS (the Kurds), but also allowing refugees to "hire Turks" to take them across to Lesbos (Greece) and thus into the EU. Many have died in the crossing, about 25 just yesterday.

And yet, the EU is paying the Turks the cost of establishing camps where the mostly Syrian refugees have escaped to in order to avoid Assad's bombing of civilians in the cities.

Goodness, are you ever ignorant of the refugee situation.

AC: "Roots of Alawite-Sunni Rivalry in Syria | Middle East Policy Council"

The Alawite's are a Shiite sect. The rivalry between Shiite and Sunni goes back to the 8th century.

The overwhelming majority of Syrians are Sunnites. The Alawites are a tiny minority in Syria, but control the country since Hafez Assad took power 1971. Syria has become an Assad "family affair", which has no political legitimacy whatsoever.

So much for your understanding of what's happening in Syria.

AC: "It was foreign forces (ISI, Al-Nursa, and foreign Jihadist) who really changed the Syria Civil War to what it is today."

The IS in Raqqa, Syria are a jihadist Sunnite group that was concocted whilst ex-officers of the Iraqi Army were interned in Camp Bucca run by Americans. They transferred from Baghdad to Raqqa when they took from Assad the oil-fields in eastern Syria which initially funded their group. Then they took Mosoul in 2014, a Sunnite town in northern Iraq where they supposedly found cash horde of $430M.

It is "natural" that they should seek the overthrowing of Assad, a Shiite, in order to install their Sunni Caliphate there. Anywhere else in the Middle-east and they'd get the boot.

You have no understanding of the underlying religious factions (of Muslims) in this Middle-east Mess.

AC: "No doubt Assad has done bad things but he's not directly resonsible for the "Great Migration."

Dead wrong, again.

When he ran out of bombs four years ago, he started dumping oil-drums filled with explosives upon Sunni towns across northern Syria, and is responsible for at least 250,000 civilian deaths. Which caused the Sunnis to flee to Lebanon and to Turkey. Both of which countries were being paid by the UN to open/maintain the refugee camps. After two years, the people got fed up with living in a tent - they decamped and sought to enter Europe.

Most are now "Europe's problems" ...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NB: I tire of your fantasizing. You're picking a forum battle for no apparent reason except to pick a battle.

Most people move on - but like others on the Replicant Right, you throw yourself rabidly into the melee.

I'm done with you, and will ignore any further of your comments in this forum.

Get a life ...

Lafayette said:

Rubbish again.

Your parents were the victims of an oppressive Communist dictatorship that crumbled finally and has been replaced by a Plutocracy. Pity Russia for what it has become - Russians deserved better.

If you had bothered to look at the descriptions I posted, you would have learned that Social Democracy is viable in a market-economy based upon capitalism.

In fact, Social Democracy is now the predominant system of political governance in the European Union, largely resulting from of the failure of Communism in Russia. (And China as well.)

The US (a market-economy) is the exact opposite of Russia, but results are similar. Income Disparity has incarcerated 15% of the population below the Poverty Threshold since 1965. This means that families of four (two adults, two children) must exist on $23,283 per year, which is bare subsistence in the US. (That figure from the Census Bureau Excel Sheet titled Poverty Thresholds for 2012 by Size of Family and Number of Related Children Under 18 Years .)

No doubt, America is not Russia in terms of individual freedom even today under Putin. But, as I said, you are confusing Communism and Social Democracy.

You should know better ...

Click to expand...

My parents were indeed as you put it "the victims of an oppressive Communist dictatorship"!

But do you actually believe that is what Lenin's Socialist revolutionaries were fighting for?!

What you people don't understand is that "Socialism" always culminates in Totalitarianism_

In some cases fast and in other cases slow and drawn out__but it will invariably be the case_

"Socialism is like a weed that will never remain confined to one small plot at the end of a row,
It forever seeks to grow and spread until it consumes the entire garden and destroys the crop"
~Hogtrash

Mach said:

Really, just stop. Why not just fess up that you're posting is purely for propaganda purposes.

The U.S. market based economy results mirror Russia. Good grief.

Click to expand...

There's a very good possibility that this isn't "propaganda" at all_

Monsieur Lafayette might just actually believe this is all the truth_

Empirica said:

What you people don't understand is that "Socialism" always culminates in Totalitarianism_

Click to expand...

Only because it suits your arguments that you "want it so". It also indicates that you have no foundation whatsoever in the subject, so you won't be voting for Bernie, will you?

I have given you the link to Social Democracy, to which you make no reference - so I assume its explanation does not suit you. I happen to live in a Social Democratic country (France), run by an incompetent Socialist government, which has a market-economy based upon capitalism. No one here would think for a nanosecond that the Socialists are installing a "totalitarian" regime here. The most strident that the Socialists ever get is in maintaining the 35-hour workweek, which has hobbled French productivity and caused companies to flee to Eastern Europe or China for production.

So, no, I am not inclined to believe for a nanosecond the nonsense that is contained in the above quotation.

That was your experience in Russia, and your experience alone. (Count your blessings, you were lucky to get out. Putin is no better.)

But your naiveté is irresponsible as regards the facts of the matter. Socialist governments do not turn to totalitarianism unless by popular will - and, to date, in the history of mankind not one people have voted to install a totalitarian regime having evolved from a capitalist system. Russia, China and North Korea are all products of a bloody revolution that installed totalitarian regimes.

(Of course, with Trump in the offing, the possibility of a totalitarian regime in the US remains a distinct possibility ... )

Lafayette said:

Only because it suits your arguments that you "want it so".

Click to expand...

Wrong; it suits reality because reality is where the socialist indicators always point!

Consider one of many common denominators of Socialism__It invariably disarms the people!

Why would a system that proclaims to be for the benefit of common people, fear them so much?

Because the 1st policy of Socialism has always been "like it or not, we're going to do what's best for you"!

It also indicates that you have no foundation whatsoever in the subject, so you won't be voting for Bernie, will you?

Click to expand...

Nope; but the large numbers of young people supporting Bernie Sanders is admittedly alarming_

The naturally rebellious nature of young people has always made them the most susceptible to Marxist indoctrination_

Empirica said:

The naturally rebellious nature of young people has always made them the most susceptible to Marxist indoctrination_

Click to expand...

damn right!!!

REAL TOTALITARIANISM

Empirica said:

The naturally rebellious nature of young people has always made them the most susceptible to Marxist indoctrination_

Click to expand...

Cockamamie nonsense.

Rant on - from a country with rampant Income Disparity, that is bleeding the poor economically whilst a billionaire Donald Trump struts his idiot political-notions in a Replicant primary.

For totalitarianism to happen, all Uncle Sam needs is Trump as PotUS with both Chambers of Congress in the hands of the Replicants.

From there, the direction is straight downhill to Real Totalitarianism, an outcome that Americans would very much deserve ...

Empirica:
The naturally rebellious nature of young people has always made them the most susceptible to Marxist indoctrination_

Click to expand...

dimensionallava said:

damn right!!!

Click to expand...

Lafayette said:

Cockamamie nonsense.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Let's see; one of you, the communist, agrees with me :unsure13: while the other, a centrist, does not!

So ask yourselves; which of the 2 is most likely the best authority on the subject of "Marxist indoctrination"?

Rant on -

Click to expand...

Oh don't be silly_ :giggle1:

I never "rant"_ :2no4:

I simply educate_ rof

Have a lovely day~ eace

Lafayette said:

- from a country with rampant "Economic_inequality" Income Disparity, that is bleeding the poor economically whilst a billionaire Donald Trump struts his idiot political-notions in a Replicant primary.

Click to expand...

Exactly where does "rampant income inequality" not exist discounting countries where rampant poverty is the national norm or where government determines the definition of success and the level an individual is permitted to attain, according to whatever standard it deems fit?

You probably don't realize it, but the poverty stricken people of the U.S. have such things as cars, AC, cable tv and free healthcare; which is a good thing because America also has the fattest poor people in the world!

And from everything I have seen, heard and read, according to statistics and studies; the great majority of people at the bottom of the economic ladder are there because of a long list of bad choices which they themselves are entirely responsible for_

Something that progressive indoctrination fails to inform people about is that capitalism does by far provide the best opportunity equality for an individual to attain the highest level of financial success, according to their own abilities_

What could possibly be more fair than the opportunity equality and the safety nets for failure, than those mentioned above?

But forcibly taking from one to give to another, then labeling it equality of all things; is blatant injustice by any human standard!

Go Bernie!!!

Social Democrat, only Senate member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC )!

The CPC promotes The Progressive Promise.

The reason we became the world's wealthiest country is freedom. Businesses thrive here because they are free to do so. That is good because it is business profits that made us the wealthiest country in the world. You may want to consider that, OP, as you seek to put a chokehold on that freedom.

fmw said:

The reason we became the world's wealthiest country is freedom.

Click to expand...

the freedom to own slaves maybe....

dimensionallava said:

the freedom to own slaves maybe....

Click to expand...

Certainly not. We became the world's wealthiest country after the end of slavery. What causes your hatred of America?

fmw said:

Certainly not. We became the world's wealthiest country after the end of slavery. What causes your hatred of America?

Click to expand...

why does acknowledging history, mean I hate america? A 9 year old could tell you the slavery of africans and the genocide of indians is what built america, up until the 1960's the only people who had any freedom where white people. So saying "freedom" did anything for america is laughable, unless your talking about the freedom to own slaves....

dimensionallava said:

So saying "freedom" did anything for america is laughable.

Click to expand...

Just understand that you are the only one laughing.

So back on topic, the U.S. and many westernized nations are so free when it comes to public participation in the economy, that they can start a business under socialist, semi-socialist, or not at all socialist, styles rules, and for the most part no one can say a thing about it, as long as they don't discriminate and still provide basic labor requirements.

The fact is, it rarely works, and in cases it does work, there are usually circumstances that reveal it works IN SPITE OF such rules. It's so rare in practice though that it's barely a footnote.

Most in the U.S. prefer to work for a paycheck and that's about it. They aren't all that interested in the rest, too stressful, too chaotic, too competitive, too boring, etc., etc. Yes, we all may WANT them to be more interested in work and finance and investment, etc., but we have one short life apparently, and people say with their actions "stuff it".

If you ask them "would you like to have more money"? Sure. "would you prefer that more people made more money" Sure. Would you do what you need to do to earn more? ERrr.

I would suggest what ails the U.S. worker the most, by far, in any measure, is nearly unfettered overseas labor competition. You could have a better job, that pays better, and is more interesting, and in a growth industry...tomorrow, but we have 3x more people in China, Vietnam, Indonesia, India, etc., doing your high tech SERVICE...not just manufacturing...jobs. Not old stuff either, cutting edge. But raise taxes instead and give handouts, surely that's a long term solution.